ISLAMABAD: Tehrik-e-Insaaf (PTI) is not planning to make the contempt notice to Imran Khan as a matter of ego, and MNA Shafqat Mahmood says the SC was not attacked at all, but judiciary in general was criticised for which the PTI has a number of cases which can be produced as evidence, if needed.
Shafqat said that latest comment of the PTI chief regarding rigging in polls was not about the Supreme Court but about the “judiciary”. He said that whole Pakistan was witness to the worst ever pre-poll rigging by returning officers in many part, so the country and all this was being continuously reported in media.
He said that criticizing any court’s judgement was never a contempt of court. Personally he had one objection about the judiciary that suo moto notices on very ordinary issues were taken, but no suo moto action was taken regarding the huge complaints of rigging in polls.
He said PTI’s petition for thumb verification only in four constituencies was not taken up. Shafqat quickly added that these were his personal views, and the party will come up with its official viewpoint soon.
In three quick messages sent on Twitter, the PTI MNA from Lahore wrote: “Why contempt notice to IK when hordes of others including Faisal Abidi and Aitzaz have questioned conduct of CJ and SC. Selective justice?!
“Criticising judicial officers for bias and incompetence also does not contempt as they were acting as officials of the EC and not judges.”
“Making a fair comment on judicial decisions is not considered contempt of court in any democratic society. Notice to IK incomprehensible.”
So, while the PTI will not make a fuss about the notice, if the court pushed it to present the evidence on which the party chief Imran Khan made his criticism, the details would be made available.
The issues which the PTI may bring to the court’s notice include that no clear orders for ousting of tax evaders or fake degree holders, violators of law of filing mandatory income returns and not deciding issue long pendency of cases of loan defaulters.
These issues also include that the mechanism to oust any person convicted in a corruption cases or defaulted a loan was clear, but returning officers and Election Commission needed a clear direction from the Supreme Court on the issue ex-MPs refused to get their degrees verified, on verification of degrees degree submitted by politicians in 2008 polls, but they lost elections, on issue of tax evaders, on issue those who were getting prepared to become legislator but were violating law of filing mandatory returns of income, on issue of where it was proved that a politician has defaulted loan and same was verified by the SBP, but there was a long stay order by a court of law, on the issue of consulting the list 3.5 million citizens who were tax evaders according to joint investigations of Nadra and FBR and on many such issues.
PTI leaders say that when the apex court issued an order to returning officers to provide copies of nomination papers to general public during the dates of submission of nomination papers for May 11 elections, the ECP suddenly applied heavy fees on getting copies and despite this returning officers refused to issue copies. The ECP uploaded nomination papers on web, but only 3 or 4 percent nomination papers of non-important politicians were available on website till last date of filing objections.
PTI leaders raise questions as to how the SC could order verification of degree of a politician who contested 2008 polls while not ordering the same verification of degrees of those who lost the same election and contested 2013 polls.
How can the Supreme Court disqualify a person for submitting fake degree in 2008 election and do not order the verification of degrees of all other candidates who contested 2008 elections in a situation when chairman HEC Javed Leghari is on record having said that HEC can verify any degree on the same it is submitted.
According to PTI leaders that not barring those who submitted fake degrees in 2008 elections but contested May 11, 2013 polls was astonishing. This was something to be done by the Supreme Court and not by the returning officers as it was out of their domain to order for verification of any documents which was not even submitted with 2013 election nomination papers (as degree was not a condition in 2013 polls) and only superior judiciary could pass an order in this behalf.
The PTI leadership is also curious that when tax and loan default cases of political elite can remain pending for years all such elements are allowed to contest polls.
PTI leaders also add that there are some cases of people having dual nationality in 2002 and 2008, but they contested the polls. They question that if some person winning 2008 polls is disqualified for having a fake degree or being dual national, any person who committed the same crime but lost the polls should not go Scot free just because of his affiliation with some political party.
PTI leaders say had the SC ordered, the ECP would have provided all record of those contestants of 2002 and 2008 polls, who were also contesting 2013 polls, to HEC, so their degrees as submitted during those polls could be verified and some independent FIA officers could investigate dual nationality of these contestants of 2002 and 2008 polls.
PTI leaders also believe that members of the lower judiciary played negative role in whole election process, and it remained unnoticed. There was evidence of rigging which were ignored. PTI’s request to verify thumb impressions of only four constituencies was ignored. PTI also believe that though ruling party has clear majority in presidential polls, but all democratic forces should have been given the chance to run election campaign which could result in formation of a big alliance.
No comments:
Post a Comment